Wood on Words: Writer shares thoughts on writing issue

I received an email in reaction to my previous column. It actually arrived before the column appeared in print — ah, the wonders of the Internet!

Barry Wood

I received an email in reaction to my previous column. It actually arrived before the column appeared in print — ah, the wonders of the Internet!

The writer, Kate Gladstone, CEO for Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works, makes three points offering some perspective on the issue of teaching students how to write in cursive.

For people whose concern is that students denied such training would be unable to read valuable handwritten documents and letters, she said that reading cursive is indeed important and can be taught in 30 to 60 minutes to a young child who already knows how to read printed material.

“The value of reading cursive is therefore no justification for writing it.”

Also, she wrote, research shows that “the fastest and most legible handwriters avoid cursive. They join only some letters, not all of them.”

My own handwriting is just such a hybrid, which evolved over the years. Of course, I had to learn how to write in cursive before I could improve upon it.

In that case, the email writer said, “there are actually handwriting programs that teach this way,” which could certainly save a step or two in the process.

Her final point was that “cursive signatures have no special legal validity over signatures written any other way.”

This calls to mind those scenes in movies and TV shows in which people “make their mark,” usually an “X,” on a contract or some other legal paper because they don’t know how to write. I’ve always seen this as a sign of a gap in formal education, maybe because the film characters often seem embarrassed by it.

I think it is a matter of pride for most people to be able to sign their name, so maybe we could at least teach that much handwriting.

Of course, what passes for handwriting among a number of educated people is essentially illegible. Doctors’ writing on prescription orders and such, for instance, has long been a target for jokes.

And think of the economic effect on autograph collectors, for example, if no one signs things anymore. However, it must be said that signatures by many current professional athletes also defy deciphering.

The word “write,” by the way, has been traced to the Old English “writan,” which also meant “to scratch, engrave,” which was akin to the German “reissen” for “to tear.”

The word “print” also has a somewhat violent past. Its root is the Latin “premere,” meaning “to press.” and that came from an Indo-European base that meant “to strike.”

So “print” and “press” are related, and even appear together in the term “printing press.”
Most of us learned to print before we learned to write, and some of us have our writing appear in print. But now we write on computers by pressing buttons.

And instead of writer’s cramp, we get carpal tunnel syndrome.

I wonder what they’ll call the affliction that’s sure to come for the texting generation — numb thumb, perhaps?

So, does knowing how to write in cursive have to be part of an educated person’s skill set? Is it merely nostalgia that drives that feeling among people who don’t want to see it fade away?